The court affirmed that a Civil Court has jurisdiction to adjudicate a suit for eviction of a trespasser, and a decree can be granted based on admissions under Order XII Rule 6 of CPC.

JUDGMENT :

1. Both the Appeals challenge the common order passed in Notice of Motion No.1729 of 2024, Notice of Motion No.1761 of 2024 and Notice of Motion No.3803 of 2024 in S.C. Suit No.4902 of 2024 and order below Exhibit 1 in S.C. Suit No.624 of 2024 by which S.C. Suit No.4902 of 2024 came to be decreed and S.C. Suit No.624 of 2024 was dismissed. Common submissions were advanced and the Appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The present Appellant is the Defendant No.2 in S.C.Suit No.4902 of 2024 and Plaintiff in S.C. Suit No.624 of 2024. S.C.Suit No.4902 of 2024 was instituted by the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 interalia for a declaration that the Appellant is a rank trespasser in respect of Flat No.2002, 20^th Floor, admeasuring 68.30 sqr.mtrs. in building known as “Yasmin Towers” situated at Sane Guruji Marg, Jacob Circle, Byculla, Mumbai – 400 011 and for direction to vacate and handover the peaceful possession of the suit premises and permanent injunction.

3. S.C.Suit No.624 of 2024 was instituted by the present Appellant seeking permanent injunction restraining the Respondents herein from forcibly dispossessing the Plaintiff from the suit premises without following due process of law.

4. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their status in S.C. Suit No.4902 of 2024.

PLEADINGS:

S.C.SUIT NO.4902 OF 2024:

5. The Plaint pleads that the Plaintiffs are co-owners of the suit premises. Defendant No.1 is former licensee of Plaintiffs who was permitted use of the suit premises under a unregistered Leave and License Agreement dated 10^th May, 2023 which expired on 9^th April, 2024. Defendant No.1 was initially regular in making payment of monthly compensation, however, from October, 2023, she requested the monthly compensation to be adjusted against the security deposit. As the security deposit got exhausted, on 6^th February, 2024, the Plaintiffs called upon Defendant No.1 to vacate the suit premises by 10^th February, 2024. On 8^th February, 2024, the Plaintiffs were served with copy of suit filed by the Defendant No.2 seeking injunctive reliefs against the Plaintiffs. Upon enquiries, the Plaintiffs became aware that Defendant No.2 was residing in the suit premises instead of Defendant No.1. The Defendant No.2 has entered into registered Leave and License agreement in respect of Defendant No.1’s flat being Flat No.22/42, Zenab Building, which is different from suit premises and sought eviction of Defendant No.2 being rank trespasser.

S.C. SUIT NO.624 OF 2024:

6. The plaint pleads that Plaintiff is residing in the suit premises since 30^th May, 2023 and is in possession of registered leave and license agreement and electricity bill to show possession. The Defendant No.1 agreed to give her residential flat i.e. Flat No.22/42, Zenab Block on leave and license basis to Defendant No.2 who paid Rs 18,25,000/- to Defendant No.1. Defendant No.1 asked Defendant No.2 to be witness to the leave and license agreement in respect of the suit premises, which he agreed. The Defendant No.1 instead of shifting Defendant No.2 to Flat No.22/42, Zenab Block informed him that he can buy the suit premises rented by her and security deposit will be adjusted against the sale consideration. Recently, the Plaintiffs who are owners of the suit premises threatened to evict the Defendant No.2 and hence suit for injunction was filed against dispossession without following due process of law.

NOTICE OF MOTIO